And now, instead of donating the money to people with disabilities, Lauren McClusky has to defend herself against avaricious, McShitbags (read: lawyers).

So to McDonalds, I say the following:

The "Mc" or "Mac" prefix on a last name means "son."  Lauren McClusky obviously has Gaelic heritage, and I'm fairly sure she will not change her name to placate you morons, who don't have the brains to tell the difference between intentional infringement on your trademarks and innocent coincidence and don't have the heart to leave well enough alone.  She was born with that name and has just as much right to it as you have to your supercilious toys, cheap plastic gadgets and dry, revolting quasi-burgers.

So you try to punish a girl who is trying to do something charitable and good with your litigious assbaggery.  So instead of helping those less fortunate, the money is going into the pockets of yet another band of avaricious McShitbags (read: lawyers) hired to defend this kid against your consummate cocksackery!  Instead of maybe even offering to help this girl with what is unarguably a wonderful cause and maybe garner some positive publicity (despite your greasy, salty, vomitous food), you kneejerk into the courts and cause more harm than good.

Nice, McDonalds.  Real nice.  NOT.

I realize that there's a need to protect one's trademarks, but I also understand that there's something called common decency, and you McLack it.

As far as I'm concerned, you band of vultures have gone too far.

I'm going to make sure that no one in my family ever patronizes your foul restaurants again.  I'm also going to ensure that as many folks as possible read this blog entry and that they, too, shun your abhorrent excuse for food, and that they spread the word about your douchebaggery far and wide.

MEANWHILE, FOR THOSE OF YOU BLAMING CORPORATE GREED AND DEMANDING THAT GOVERNMENT DECIDE THE LIMITS OF ACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOR IN CORPORATE AMERICA, I'll say to you what I said to another whining dimbulb on John Stossel's blog, who whined, "But Mr Stossel, I thought whatever a corporation wants to do, it should be allowed to do!! Unrestrained capitalism, isn't that the goal? So what if McDonald's wants to destroy this kid. If McDs is stopped now,next thing you know, fast food will be banned!!... OK, so I was being sarcastic. Point is, there are always limits that decide what's acceptable behavior. That remains the case under any system, even in capitalism.The moral of the story? Be careful what you ask for; you might get it!"

Yes, corporations can and should do what they want, including bring suit against this kid. They are welcome and should have the right to be as indecent as they deem necessary, and we limit unacceptable behavior by spreading information about it to others and hitting them where it hurts most - their wallet - their profits. THAT's how true capitalism works - not via government force or mandate.


For those of you who still are confused about what I am saying, let me make it perfectly clear.  The corporation has every right to protect its trademark.  It has the right to file suit if it so chooses, and no - there has been no lawsuit filed here, in case you guys aren't clear about that. People can be dragged through the courts for any number of things that don't involve a lawsuit.   However, the question is: how can it be reasonable for McDonald's to lay claim to the prefix "Mc" or "Mac" and file objections every time anyone tries to use said prefix and legally make it theirs???? Is it ethical?  I don't think so.  Is it realistic? No, I don't think so - not with millions of Americans having Gaelic prefixes to their surnames.  And it's downright petty.  Pettiness is not illegal.  But we, as free citizens, certainly should have the right to punish said pettiness - not with courts, government force or any such thing - but with our choices and our wallets.

Alles klar?